Genetic Data Show That Carcharhinus Tilstoni Is Not Confined to the Tropics

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Genetic Data Show That Carcharhinus Tilstoni Is Not Confined to the Tropics Journal of Fish Biology (2010) 77, 1165–1172 doi:10.1111/j.1095-8649.2010.02770.x, available online at wileyonlinelibrary.com Genetic data show that Carcharhinus tilstoni is not confined to the tropics, highlighting the importance of a multifaceted approach to species identification J. J. Boomer*†, V. Peddemors‡ andA.J.Stow* *Department of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW 2109, Australia and ‡Cronulla Fisheries Research Centre of Excellence, P.O. Box 21, Cronulla, NSW 2230, Australia (Received 26 June 2010, Accepted 9 August 2010) This study shows a range extension for the Australian blacktip shark Carcharhinus tilstoni,which was believed to be restricted to Australia’s tropical waters, of >1000 km into temperate waters, revealing its vulnerability to a wider commercial fishery. © 2010 The Authors Journal compilation © 2010 The Fisheries Society of the British Isles Key words: blacktip shark; Carcharhinus limbatus; mtDNA; shark fishery; species distribution. Sharks are proving to be especially vulnerable to anthropogenic pressures, in part this is a response to the K-selected natural-history traits that characterize many species along with pressure from targeted and non-targeted fishing activities (Stevens et al., 2000). In many cases, species distributions span state and international management boundaries, across which protection and management processes may vary for any given species (Last & Stevens, 2009). Therefore, effective conservation and manage­ ment require knowledge of species distributions. Despite the size and notoriety of sharks, distributions of some species remain uncertain due to limited opportunities for observation or difficulties with species identification. Sharks, especially those in the carcharhinid family, can be very difficult to identify to species level using morphological features (Chan et al., 2003). Distinguishing features for some species are few, and sharks caught by commercial fishers often have important features removed (e.g. head and teeth) before being landed ashore, making reliable identification very difficult (Chan et al., 2003; Last & Stevens, 2009). The fin trade exacerbates problems with identifying harvested sharks. A solution has been found with the development of DNA markers for species identification. Over the last decade, rapid improvements in DNA technology have seen a suite of markers developed which require only a small sample of tissue for reliable species identification (Chapman et al., 2003; Greig et al., 2005; Ward et al., 2008). The use of this technology has resulted in further taxonomic revision and improved †Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.: +61 2 9850 8143; fax: +61 2 9850 7972; email: [email protected] 1165 © 2010 The Authors Journal compilation © 2010 The Fisheries Society of the British Isles 1166 J. J. BOOMER ET AL . knowledge of shark species distributions (Gardner & Ward, 2002; Quattro et al., 2006; Corrigan et al., 2008). There are two species of shark referred to by the common name blacktip shark, the common blacktip shark Carcharhinus limbatus (Muller¨ & Henle) and the Australian blacktip shark Carcharhinus tilstoni (Whitley). These species are distinguished by vertebral counts and forensic methods (Lavery & Shaklee, 1991; Last & Stevens, 2009). Carcharhinus limbatus has a global distribution while C. tilstoni is believed to be restricted to the tropical waters off northern Australia (Fig. 1) where it occurs in sympatry with C. limbatus (Last & Stevens, 2009). Blacktip sharks are taken in commercial fisheries worldwide. It is generally accepted that C. limbatus is taken in most regions while in northern Australia both C. limbatus and C. tilstoni are taken by commercial fisheries (Ovenden et al., 2010). At present, no external morphological features are available to distinguish these species and therefore poor knowledge of catch rates compromises the development of sustainable fisheries. DNA technologies provide a solution to this problem (Shivji et al., 2002). Blacktip sharks are within the top five shark species commercially harvested in temperate waters of New South Wales (NSW) on the Australian east coast (Macbeth et al., 2009). Additionally, they are caught in this region by the shark beach meshing programme, which operates between September and May off 51 popular beaches between Newcastle and Wollongong (Green et al., 2009a). Historically, blacktip sharks occurring in NSW waters have been classified as C. limbatus (Green et al., 2009a). The species identity of blacktip sharks occurring in NSW, however, has Sydney N km 0 312·5 625 1250 1875 2500 Fig. 1. Currently recognized distribution of Carcharhinus tilstoni ( ), which is known from Thevenard Island (Western Australia) to Rockhampton (Queensland) along the continental shelf of tropical Australia (Last & Stevens, 2009). ( ), area from which samples for this study were collected. © 2010 The Authors Journal compilation © 2010 The Fisheries Society of the British Isles, Journal of Fish Biology 2010, 77, 1165–1172 RANGE EXTENSION OF CARCHARHINUS TILSTONI 1167 never been thoroughly investigated. In this study, genetic approaches were used to identify species of blacktip sharks occurring off Sydney, NSW, Australia. Tissue samples were collected from sharks caught in the NSW Shark Meshing (Bather Protection) Program (NSWDPI, 2009) (Fig. 1). DNA was extracted using a modified salting out technique (Sunnucks & Hales, 1996). Two mitochondrial genes (COI and ND4 ) were amplified. The cytochrome oxidase I (COI ) gene was ampli­ fied with the primers FishF1Mod 5� ACC AAC CAC AAA GAY ATY GGC AC 3� (modified from Ward et al., 2005) and FishR15� TAG ACT TCT GGG TGG CCA AAG AAT CA 3� (Ward et al., 2005). The sodium dehydrogenase subunit 4 (ND4 ) gene was amplified with primers designed in this study MaND4F 5� ACC MAA AGC YCA CGT WGA AGC 3� and MaND4R 5� TCT TGC TTG GAG TTG CAC CA 3�. These genes were selected for analysis because they have previously been successfully applied to distinguish C. limbatus and C. tilstoni (Ovenden et al., 2010). The COI gene was used to initially screen samples. A total of 54 samples identified by field observers as some form of carcharhinid shark were screened, 13 of these were identified as C. limbatus and five as C. tilstoni based on COI.Asa prior study suggested that C. limbatus and C. tilstoni may share haplotypes at the COI gene (Wong et al., 2009), these 18 samples were further investigated using the ND4 gene to confirm their species identity. For both genes, PCR reactions were in 15 μL volumes and contained ×1 PCR buffer, 2 mM MgCl2,0·2 mM of each deoxynucleoside triphosphate (dNTP), 0·5 μM of each primer, 1 U Taq DNA poly­ merase (Promega; www.promega.com) and 1 μL DNA template. Cycling conditions ◦ consisted of an initial denaturation step at 94 C for 3 min, followed by a touch­ ◦ down PCR with six cycles, decreasing the annealing temperature by 1 C per cycle. ◦ ◦ Denaturation was at 94 C (30 s), annealing at 60 to 55 C (1 min) and extension ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ at 72 C (1 min). A cycle of 94 C(30s),55 C(30s) and72 C(1min)was ◦ then repeated 30 times, followed by a final extension of 72 C for 5 min. The PCR product was purified with EXOSAP-IT (USB; www.usbweb.com) and sequenced in an ABI 377 automated DNA sequencer. DNA sequences were assembled and aligned in MEGA version 4 (Tamura et al., 2007) with reference sequences for C. tilstoni and C. limbatus as well as reference sequences for the graceful shark Carcharhinus amblyrhynchoides (Whitley) and the bull shark Carcharhinus leucas (Muller¨ & Henle). Carcharhinus amblyrhynchoides has been shown to be very closely related to C. limbatus and was included in analyses to ensure this species was not present in the sample set (Ward et al., 2008; Ovenden et al., 2010). Reference sequences for each of these species were obtained for the COI region from GenBank (GenBank accession numbers: C. tilstoni, DQ108283; C. limbatus, EU39862; C. amblyrhynchoides, EF609307 and C. leucas, EF609311). The reference sequences for the ND4 gene for each species except C. leucas were obtained from Ovenden et al. (2010) (GenBank accession numbers: C. limbatus, GQ227272; C. tilstoni, GQ227268; C. amblyrhynchoides, GQ227276). The ND4 ref­ erence sequence for C. leucas was obtained as part of this study. The ND4 and COI sequences were concatenated for phylogenetic analysis giving a final sequence of 1353 base pairs (bp). Phylogenetic relationships were inferred using the neighbour­ joining (NJ) distance method implemented in MEGA 4 (Tamura et al., 2007) and the Bayesian method implemented in MrBayes 3.1 (Ronquist & Huelsebeck, 2003). For the NJ approach, the best model of nucleotide substitution was determined to be a Tamura–Nei model (TrN) using Akaike information criterion with the software © 2010 The Authors Journal compilation © 2010 The Fisheries Society of the British Isles, Journal of Fish Biology 2010, 77, 1165–1172 1168 J. J. BOOMER ET AL . FindModel (LANL, 2009), which is an internet-based application of the programme ModelTest (Posada & Crandall, 1998). Reliability of tree nodes for the NJ tree was assessed using 10 000 bootstrap replicates. The Bayesian approach to tree building was completed in MrBayes 3.1 (Ronquist & Huelsebeck, 2003) using a GTR + G substitution model. Four chains were run for 500 000 generations and a consensus tree was constructed. Carcharhinus leucas was used as the out-group for each of these phylogenetic analyses. Commercially harvested sharks, particularly species with slow growth and low fecundity such as the carcharhinids, are in dire need of well-developed management plans to slow population declines (Field et al., 2009). Of fundamental importance is the species identification. This study highlights the benefits of applying genetic approaches to species identification. The results show that the range of C. tilstoni extends into temperate waters, >1000 km further south than previously known, and that at least two species of blacktip sharks (C. limbatus and C. tilstoni ) occur in the temperate waters off Sydney, Australia. The topology of the phylogenetic trees clearly supports the presence of these two species using both the NJ and Bayesian approaches.
Recommended publications
  • An Overview of Shark Utilisation in the Coral Triangle Region (PDF, 550
    WORKING TOGETHER FOR SUSTAINABLE SHARK FISHERIES AN OVERVIEW OF SHARK UTILISATION IN THE CORAL TRIANGLE REGION Written by Mary Lack Director, Shellack Pty Ltd Glenn Sant Fisheries Programme Leader, TRAFFIC & Senior Fellow, ANCORS Published in September 2012 This report can be downloaded from wwf.panda.org/coraltriangle Citation Lack M. and Sant G. (2012). An overview of shark utilisation in the Coral Triangle region. TRAFFIC &WWF. Photo cover © naturepl.com / Jeff Rotman / WWF-Canon Thanks to the Rufford Lang Foundation for supporting the development of this publication 2 An Overview Of Shark Utilisation In The Coral Triangle Region ACRONYMS ASEAN Association of Southeast Asian Nations BFAR Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (the Philippines) CCSBT Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna CITES Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora CMM Conservation and Management Measure CMS Convention on Migratory Species of Wild Animals CNP Co-operating Non-Contracting party COFI Committee on Fisheries (of FAO) CoP Conference of the Parties (to CITES) EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone EU European Union FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations IOTC Indian Ocean Tuna Commission IPOA-Sharks International Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks IUU Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (fishing) MoU Memorandum of Understanding on the Conservation of Migratory Sharks (CMS) nei Not elsewhere included NPOA-Sharks National Plan of Action for the Conservation and
    [Show full text]
  • Species Composition of the Largest Shark Fin Retail-Market in Mainland
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Species composition of the largest shark fn retail‑market in mainland China Diego Cardeñosa1,2*, Andrew T. Fields1, Elizabeth A. Babcock3, Stanley K. H. Shea4, Kevin A. Feldheim5 & Demian D. Chapman6 Species‑specifc monitoring through large shark fn market surveys has been a valuable data source to estimate global catches and international shark fn trade dynamics. Hong Kong and Guangzhou, mainland China, are the largest shark fn markets and consumption centers in the world. We used molecular identifcation protocols on randomly collected processed fn trimmings (n = 2000) and non‑ parametric species estimators to investigate the species composition of the Guangzhou retail market and compare the species diversity between the Guangzhou and Hong Kong shark fn retail markets. Species diversity was similar between both trade hubs with a small subset of species dominating the composition. The blue shark (Prionace glauca) was the most common species overall followed by the CITES‑listed silky shark (Carcharhinus falciformis), scalloped hammerhead shark (Sphyrna lewini), smooth hammerhead shark (S. zygaena) and shortfn mako shark (Isurus oxyrinchus). Our results support previous indications of high connectivity between the shark fn markets of Hong Kong and mainland China and suggest that systematic studies of other fn trade hubs within Mainland China and stronger law‑enforcement protocols and capacity building are needed. Many shark populations have declined in the last four decades, mainly due to overexploitation to supply the demand for their fns in Asia and meat in many other countries 1–4. Mainland China was historically the world’s second largest importer of shark fns and foremost consumer of shark fn soup, yet very little is known about the species composition of shark fns in this trade hub2.
    [Show full text]
  • And Their Functional, Ecological, and Evolutionary Implications
    DePaul University Via Sapientiae College of Science and Health Theses and Dissertations College of Science and Health Spring 6-14-2019 Body Forms in Sharks (Chondrichthyes: Elasmobranchii), and Their Functional, Ecological, and Evolutionary Implications Phillip C. Sternes DePaul University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://via.library.depaul.edu/csh_etd Part of the Biology Commons Recommended Citation Sternes, Phillip C., "Body Forms in Sharks (Chondrichthyes: Elasmobranchii), and Their Functional, Ecological, and Evolutionary Implications" (2019). College of Science and Health Theses and Dissertations. 327. https://via.library.depaul.edu/csh_etd/327 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Science and Health at Via Sapientiae. It has been accepted for inclusion in College of Science and Health Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Via Sapientiae. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Body Forms in Sharks (Chondrichthyes: Elasmobranchii), and Their Functional, Ecological, and Evolutionary Implications A Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science June 2019 By Phillip C. Sternes Department of Biological Sciences College of Science and Health DePaul University Chicago, Illinois Table of Contents Table of Contents.............................................................................................................................ii List of Tables..................................................................................................................................iv
    [Show full text]
  • Species Carcharhinus Brachyurus (Günther, 1870
    FAMILY Carcharhinidae Jordan & Evermann, 1896 - requiem sharks [=Triaenodontini, Prionidae, Cynocephali, Galeocerdini, Carcharhininae, Eulamiidae, Loxodontinae, Scoliodontinae, Galeolamnidae, Rhizoprionodontini, Isogomphodontini] GENUS Carcharhinus Blainville, 1816 - requiem sharks [=Aprion, Aprionodon, Bogimba, Carcharias, Eulamia, Galeolamna, Galeolamnoides, Gillisqualus, Gymnorhinus, Hypoprion, Hypoprionodon, Isoplagiodon, Lamnarius, Longmania, Mapolamia, Ogilamia, Platypodon, Pterolamia, Pterolamiops, Uranga, Uranganops] Species Carcharhinus acarenatus Moreno & Hoyos, 1983 - Moroccan shark Species Carcharhinus acronotus (Poey, 1860) - blacknose shark [=remotus] Species Carcharhinus albimarginatus (Rüppell, 1837) silvertip shark [=platyrhynchus] Species Carcharhinus altimus (Springer, 1950) - bignose shark [=radamae] Species Carcharhinus amblyrhynchoides (Whitley, 1934) - graceful shark Species Carcharhinus amblyrhynchos (Bleeker, 1856) - grey reef shark [=coongoola, fowleri, nesiotes, tufiensis] Species Carcharhinus amboinensis (Müller & Henle, 1839) - Java shark [=brachyrhynchos, henlei, obtusus] Species Carcharhinus borneensis (Bleeker, 1858) - Borneo shark Species Carcharhinus brachyurus (Günther, 1870) - copper shark, bronze whaler, narrowtooth shark [=ahenea, improvisus, lamiella, remotoides, rochensis] Species Carcharhinus brevipinna (Müller & Henle, 1839) - great blacktip shark [=brevipinna B, calamaria, caparti, johnsoni, maculipinnis, nasuta] Species Carcharhinus cautus (Whitley, 1945) - nervous shark Species Carcharhinus
    [Show full text]
  • PRESENT STATUS of Silky Shark, Thresher Sharks, Mobulid Rays and Banggai Cardinafish in Indonesia
    Regional Experts Mee1ng on Commercially-Exploited Aqua1c Species: Sharks 16-17 May 2016 , Bangkok, Thailand PRESENT STATUS of Silky shark, Thresher sharks, Mobulid rays and Banggai cardinafish in Indonesia Dharmadi Center for Fisheries Research and Development, Agency of Marine and Fisheries Research and Development, Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries. Jl. Pasir Putih II, Ancol Timur Jakarta 14430 Indonesia •Email: dharmadi.shark.gmail.com Introduction Indonesia as a nation is home to more shark and ray fishing activities than any other and is one of the highest volume exporters of sharks fins in the world (Blaber et al., 2009). Over the past several decades, national shark production in particular has declined by 28,30%, from 63,366 tons in 2000 to 68 366 tonnes in 2014 (DGCF, 2016). 80 000 70 000 60 000 50 000 (Source : DGCF, 2016) 40 000 30 000 Production (t) Production 20 000 10 000 - 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08 10 12 14 Trend production of sharks based on shark group in 2002-2014. 70 000 Thresher sharks 60 000 Requiem sharks Mackerel sharks 50 000 Hammerhead sharks 40 000 Dogfish sharks 30 000 Productioni (t) 20 000 10 000 - 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 (Source : DGCF, 2016) Trend production of Thresher sharks in 200-2014 70 000 60 000 50 000 40 000 30 000 Production (t) 20 000 10 000 - 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 (Source : DGCF, 2016) Species composition of sharks landed at Cilacap (2015) 1 Alopias pelagicus Pelagic Thresher 967 25.03 2 Alopias superciliosus Bigeye Thresher 674 17.45 3 Isurus oxyrinchus Shortfin Mako 62 1.60 4 Isurus paucus Longfin Mako 36 0.93 C.
    [Show full text]
  • A Shark Conservationists Toolbox: Current DNA Methods and Techniques Aiding in the Conservation of Sharks
    Nova Southeastern University NSUWorks All HCAS Student Theses, Dissertations, and Capstones HCAS Student Theses and Dissertations 8-5-2020 A Shark Conservationists Toolbox: Current DNA Methods and Techniques Aiding in the Conservation of Sharks Arianna N. Nixon Nova Southeastern University Follow this and additional works at: https://nsuworks.nova.edu/hcas_etd_all Part of the Genetics and Genomics Commons, and the Marine Biology Commons Share Feedback About This Item NSUWorks Citation Arianna N. Nixon. 2020. A Shark Conservationists Toolbox: Current DNA Methods and Techniques Aiding in the Conservation of Sharks. Capstone. Nova Southeastern University. Retrieved from NSUWorks, . (4) https://nsuworks.nova.edu/hcas_etd_all/4. This Capstone is brought to you by the HCAS Student Theses and Dissertations at NSUWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in All HCAS Student Theses, Dissertations, and Capstones by an authorized administrator of NSUWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Capstone of Arianna N. Nixon Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science Marine Science Nova Southeastern University Halmos College of Arts and Sciences August 2020 Approved: Capstone Committee Major Professor: George Duncan Committee Member: Bernhard Riegl This capstone is available at NSUWorks: https://nsuworks.nova.edu/hcas_etd_all/4 NOVA SOUTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY HALMOS COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES A Shark Conservationists Toolbox: Current DNA Methods and Techniques Aiding in the Conservation
    [Show full text]
  • SAFS Report 2018
    STATUS OF AUSTRALIAN FISH STOCKS REPORT BLACKTIP SHARKS (2018) BLACKTIP SHARKS (2018) Carcharhinus sorrah, Carcharhinus tilstoni, Carcharhinus limbatus Grant Johnson: Department of Primary Industry and Resources, Northern Territory, Matias Braccini: Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development, Western Australia, Lisa Walton: Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, Queensland, Vic Peddemors: Department of Primary Industries, New South Wales STOCK STATUS OVERVIEW Jurisdiction Stock Fisheries Stock status Indicators Northern Territory North and BF, BNF, Sustainable Catch, mark recapture, West Coast CNF, DF, CPUE, pup production ONLF, SMF, SPDF Northern Territory, Gulf of GOCIFFF, Undefined Catch, MSY Queensland Carpentaria GOCLF, ONLF Queensland, New East Coast ECIFFF, EGF, Sustainable Catch, MSY South Wales N/A, OTF, OTLF EGF Estuary General Fishery (NSW), N/A Not Applicable (NSW), OTF Ocean Trawl Fishery (NSW), OTLF Ocean Trap and Line Fishery (NSW), BF Barramundi Fishery (NT), DF Demersal Fishery (NT), ONLF Offshore Net and Line Fishery (NT), SMF Spanish Mackerel Fishery (NT), ECIFFF East Coast Inshore Fin Fish Fishery (QLD), GOCIFFF Gulf of Carpentaria Inshore Fin Fish Fishery (QLD), GOCLF Gulf of Carpentaria Line Fishery (QLD), BNF Bait Net Fishery (NT), CNF Coastal Net Fishery (NT), SPDF Small Pelagic Developmental Fishery (NT) STOCK STRUCTURE In the context of Australian fisheries, the Blacktip Shark species complex, part of the family Carcharhinidae (whaler sharks), comprises three species: Carcharhinus tilstoni (Australian Blacktip Shark), C. limbatus (Common Blacktip Shark) and C. sorrah (Spottail Shark). Whereas C. tilstoni and C. sorrah are distributed only within Australian and Indo–West Pacific waters, respectively, C. limbatus is globally distributed in tropical and warm temperate waters.
    [Show full text]
  • Species Composition of Elasmobranchs in the Surface and Subsurface Gillnet Operation in the Northern Arabian Sea
    __________________________________________________IOTC-2019-WPEB15-13 Species composition of elasmobranchs in the surface and subsurface gillnet operation in the Northern Arabian Sea Muhammad Moazzam WWF-Pakistan, Karachi, Pakistan ([email protected]) Abstract Sharks form important part of bycatch of the tuna gillnet operations in Pakistan. WWF- Pakistan introduced subsurface gillnetting in 2014 in which gillnet are placed 1.4 to 2 m below the sea surface. Fishing fleet engaged in tuna gillnetting adopted subsurface gillnetting and by January 2016 entire tuna fleet was converted in subsurface gillnetting. Catch of endangered, threatened and protected (ETP) species such as dolphins and sea turtles were observed to be much lower in subsurface gillnet as compared to surface operations. Sharks are among the other ETP species whose catches were dropped in subsurface gillnet as compared to surface operations. It was observed that overall shark catches were 15.06 % lower in the subsurface gillnet operation as compared to surface placement of gillnets. A marked seasonality was observed in case of dominating species including mako and silky shark. Catches of mako sharks was observed to be about 8.65 % higher in subsurface gillnets as compared to surface gillnets. Introduction Sharks are considered as an important bycatch group of tuna gillnet fishing in Pakistan and other part of the Arabian Sea (Koya, 2018; Shahifar, 2018, Khan, 2013; Moazzam, 2013; Shahid et al., 2015, 2016). In Pakistan, gillnets consisting of monofilament and multifilament are used for catching tuna and tuna like species. Monofilament net is mainly used for catching neritic tuna in coastal waters whereas multifilament nylon nets are used for catching longtail tuna (Thunnus tonggol), yellowfin tuna (Thunnus albacares) and skipjack tuna (Katsuwonus pelamis) in the offshore waters.
    [Show full text]
  • WCPTOC2.CHP:Corel VENTURA
    click for previous page Carcharhinidae 1325 Carcharhinus albimarginatus (Rüppell, 1837) Frequent synonyms / misidentifications: None / Carcharhinus longimanus (Poey, 1861); Triaenodon obesus (Rüppell, 1837). FAO names: En - Silvertip shark; Fr - Requin pointe blanche; Sp - Tiburón de puntas blancas. Diagnostic characters: A large, slender to moderately stout shark. Snout moderately long and broadly parabolic, its length subequal to or slightly shorter than mouth width and equal to or greater than internasal space; labial furrows very short; anterior nasal flaps very low; spiracles absent; teeth with serrated edges, upper teeth broadly triangular and erect at front of mouth, progressively oblique posteriorly, without conspicuous cusplets; teeth in lower jaw erect and stout-cusped, serrated. First dorsal upper and lower fin moderately high, with a narrowly rounded apex, its ventral view of head tooth near centre origin over inner margins of pectoral fins; second dorsal fin moderately high, its origin about opposite that of anal fin, its inner margin less than twice its height, and its posterior margin nearly straight; pectoral fins long and slightly falcate, with narrow, pointed tips. Interdorsal ridge present. Colour: dorsal surface dark grey or grey-brown, ventral surface white; all fins have conspicuous white tips and posterior margins. Size: Maximum total length about 3 m; adults mature at 1.6 to 1.99 m; size at birth about 63 to 68 cm. Habitat, biology, and fisheries: A continental and insular species occurring from the surface to a depth of 800 m, close inshore in lagoons and near island dropoffs or well offshore, but not oceanic. Viviparous, number of embryos 1 to 11.
    [Show full text]
  • Alia2006.Pdf (2.103Mb)
    APPENDIX 3 PRELIMINARY RESULTS OF MICROSCOPIC OBSERVATION ON DERMAL DENTICLES OF SHARK FINS By Ahmad Ali Mahyam Mohd. Isa Noor Azman Zakaria Sollahuddin A. Razak Annie Lim Pheik Khiok 207 SHARKS AND RAY SPECIES USED FOR DERMAL DENTICLES STUDY DURING 2004 No Family/Species Sex Total Length Body Weight (cm) (kg) Family Sphyrnidae 1. Sphyrna lewini ♀ 50.5 0.6 2. Sphyrna lewini ♀ 50.2 0.6 3. Sphyrna lewini ♂ 89.4 3.1 4. Sphyrna lewini ♂ 46.4 0.4 5. Sphyrna lewini ♂ 44.0 0.6 6. Sphyrna lewini ♀ 59.5 1.1 7 Sphyrna lewini ♂ 56.2 0.8 8. Sphyrna mokarran ♂ 73.4 1.0 9. Sphyrna mokarran ♂ 197 33 Family Carcharhinidae 10. Carcharhinus amblyrhynchoides ♀ 90.2 5.6 11. Carcharhinus amblyrhynchoides ♀ 83.2 4.2 12. Carcharhinus amblyrhynchoides ♀ 80.2 3.7 13. Carcharhinus amblyrhynchoides ♂ 107 NA 14. Carcharhinus amblyrhynchoides NA NA NA 15. Carcharhinus leucas NA NA NA 16. Carcharhinus leucas NA NA NA 17. Carcharhinus sorrah ♀ 84.8 2.6 18. Carcharhinus sorrah ♂ 83.8 2.8 19. Carcharhinus sorrah ♀ 83.4 2.9 20. Carcharhinus sorrah ♀ 88.2 3.4 21. Carcharhinus sorrah NA NA NA 22. Carcharhinus sorrah ♂ 86.1 3.3 23. Carcharhinus sorrah ♀ 91.3 4.2 24. Loxodon macrorhinus ♂ 74.6 1.2 25. Loxodon macrorhinus ♂ 73.8 1.4 26. Loxodon macrorhinus ♂ 78 1.4 27. Loxodon macrorhinus ♀ 74.4 1.5 28. Loxodon macrorhinus ♀ 64.1 0.7 29. Loxodon macrorhinus ♀ 70.4 1.2 30. Loxodon macrorhinus ♀ 57.7 0.6 31. Rhizoprionodon acutus ♂ 84.6 2.1 32.
    [Show full text]
  • AC20 Inf. 28 Table 1. Provisional List of Key Shark Species Identified Under Res. Conf. 12.6 by the 20Th Meeting of the Animals
    AC20 Inf. 28 Table 1. Provisional list of key shark species identified under Res. Conf. 12.6 by the 20th Meeting of the Animals Committee. Species name UNCLOS CITES Shared Declining Red List * Management International stocks ** trade Hexanchus griseus Bluntnose sixgill shark Yes ? Yes NT No ? Squalus acanthias Spiny dogfish Proposed II Yes Yes NT (VU/EN) Some Yes Genus Centrophorus, Gulper Sharks (~10 species) Yes Yes DD–CR Mostly none Liver oil (meat?) Family Squatinidae Angel Sharks (~20 species) Some Yes (some) LC–EN Mostly none ? Rhincodon typus Whale shark Yes II Yes Yes VU Mostly none Yes Family Odontaspididae, Sand tigers (3 species) Yes Yes DD–VU, (NT–CR) Mostly none Fins, aquaria Genus Alopias, Thresher sharks (3 species) Yes Yes Yes DD under review (NT) Mostly none Meat and fins Cetorhinus maximus Basking shark Yes II Yes Yes VU (EN) Mostly none Fins Carcharodon carcharias Great white shark Yes III/proposed I Yes Yes VU Some Jaws and fins Genus Isurus Mako sharks (2 species) Yes Yes Yes DD under review (NT) Mostly none Meat and fins Lamna ditropis Salmon shark Yes Yes In NW Pac? DD Mostly none Meat and fins Lamna nasus Porbeagle shark Yes Proposed II Yes Yes NT (VU–EN) Mostly none Meat and fins Galeorhinus galeus School/tope/soupfin shark Yes Yes VU (NT–EN) Mostly none Meat and fins Genus Mustelus Smoothhound sharks (25 species) Yes Some LC–VU Mostly none Meat Family Carcharinidae (12 genera, 54 species) Yes Genus Carcharinus (31 species) Yes Carcharhinus albimarginatus Silvertip shark Yes Yes Yes DD (under review) None Fins
    [Show full text]
  • Florida, Bahamas, Cuba, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Venezuela. Eastern North Atlan- Tic: Senegal, Gambia, Sierra Leone, Ivory Coast and Ghana
    click for previous page - 458 - Geographical Distribution : Western Atlantic: Florida, Bahamas, Cuba, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Venezuela. Eastern North Atlan- tic: Senegal, Gambia, Sierra Leone, Ivory Coast and Ghana. Mediterranean Sea. Western Indian Ocean: South Africa, Mada- gascar, India, Red Sea. ? Western Pacific: China. Central Pacific: Hawaii. Eastern Pacific: Gulf of California, southern Mexico, Colombia, Ecuador, Revillagigedo Islands. Habitat and Biology: A common off- shore, bottom-dwelling warm-temperate and tropical shark usually found in deeper water near the edge of the continental and insular shelves and the uppermost slopes, in depths of 90 m or more down to at least 250 to 430 m. The young may occur in shallower water, up to 25 m depth. Development viviparous, number of young per litter 3 to 15. Mediterranean sharks give birth in August and September, Madagascar sharks September and October. Eats a variety of bony fishes, including lizardfish, croakers, batfish, soles, other sharks including dogfish (Squalus), catsharks (Holohalaelurus), stingrays (Dasyatis), and cuttlefish. Although of large size, this species is probably not dangerous to people because of its deep-water habitat. Size : Maximum possibly about 300 cm, mature males 216 to at least 267 cm, mature females 226 to 282 cm; size at birth probably between 70 and 90 cm. Interest to Fisheries: Apparently regularly taken in the Caribbean region on deep-set longlines (especially off Cuba, but also southern Florida), and there utilized for fishmeal, oil and shagreen; also taken in bottom trawls in the western Indian Ocean and probably by line or gillnet off India. Literature : Springer (1950); Fourmanoir (1961); Bass, D'Aubrey & Kistnasamy (1973); Garrick (1982), Morenos & Hoyos (1983).
    [Show full text]